Wednesday, July 25, 2007

I don't like cigarette smoke, especially when I am enjoying a nice meal at a local restaurant. I agree that second hand smoke is not only annoying, but probably hazardous to your health. However, I am also a staunch supporter of private property rights.

The House is soon to move HB 4163 (http://www.michiganvotes.org/2007-HB-4163) which would ban a legal activity, (smoking) on private property, (restaurants and bars). One of the fundamentals of liberty is private property rights. Individual property owners have a right to engage in any legal activity they wish on their own property. They also have the right to restrict certain legal activities on their own property. For the government to tell private businesses how to run their business; to tell private property owners what legal activities they can and cannot engage in on their own property is the height of arrogance at minimum.

In being in states like Florida where smoking in restaurants is not allowed...it's great! The restaurant owners say it speeds table turn (no lingering smoking after eating) and the waitresses love it for the above reason plus not having to work in a smoke environment. The owners do not want to make the no smoking decision but they would welcome the ban if someone else makes it!

It is a health issue and it is about time we did something about it. We care about our health. If the smokers don't care about their health, that is their business. This will lower the health insurance and reduce the number of heart problems, which has been proven already.

Very belated comment, but we are having this issue in our town right now, and I hear a lot of the same misguided "private property" arguments. A restaurant, which has to have a business license, is subject to regulations not applicable to private homes, for instance. You aren't required to have handicapped access to your front door. You don't need separate restrooms. You are allowed to have cockroaches running around your kitchen. Etc.

I've never really understood how someone can try to use a rights argument to justify behavior that we actually know is directly (immediately) harmful to other people in a public venue (the health effects of smoke wrt to things like the cardiovascular system are very well documented, not to mention people with asthma, allergies, etc). Name another area where we protect such a "right" to harm others..

Also, a very similar "let the market handle it" approach would apply to race. Imagine (I know it's hard) a situation where a largely white neighborhood has almost all of its restaurants being very hostile to black patrons, saying they can take their business elsewhere if they don't like it. Eventually you have a small number of blacks-accepted establishments, and that population would be cut out of a large part of the life of that town (shows, films, particular specialty restaurants, etc).

If anything, the ability to smoke should be an exception, and restaurants can choose to provide suitable accomodations for that which separate them from others and allow them to take the risk on themselves without pushing it onto others.

We run a bar not a restaurant. We rely on customers to be comfortable lingering, relaxing, and enjoying their stay which they cannot do if they cannot stay and smoke. It's the same as slitting our throats and leaving us bleeding in the street if this bill passes. Our livelihoods lost and our children starving. Look out unemployment line here we come! I agree on the Keno boycott if this bill passes. The state's pocketbook can feel it too!

It's a little late now for all this talk of action. Everyone had fore warning. Everyone could look at what it did to businesses in other states. Everyone kept quiet and let this happen. It is much harder to undo what's already been done. Bar owners in particular should have fought this from the first mention of the words "smoking ban".

This is only the start of future control by our government. As bar owners and restaurant owners, we need to stand against the smoking ban and allow smoking if we feel it is best for our business. If we all stick together, what are they going to do? In another state all business owner's elected to continue to allow smoking. The end result, the ban was reversed.There are plenty of non-smoking places, everyone has a choice. The problem here is no one wants to act and fight to preserve our rights as property owners. Personally if it's comes to the loss of my business, I will have to make my choice to protect my investment and my staff's job. They have bills they need to pay, as do I....